- kymki parentI added an example of some music other than what you describe in comments above (below? in some direction)?
- Strudel did something many other approaches to live coding have failed to do imho. No hosting needed. Just open the web based REPL and go. Great entry to live coding, but you quickly run into limitations.
Here is a piece inspired by Dawn of Midi and my attempt at taking a piano synth and trying to make it sound like a lof of different things.
Copy, paste, modify.
const bpm = 138; setcps(bpm/60/4);
// Pattern 1: lower melodic pulse
const bass_pulse = note("<d2 f2 a2 g2>") .s("piano") .slow(4) .gain(rand.range(0.45, 0.65)) .attack(0.005) .decay(0.8) .sustain(1.2) .release(1.2) .lpf(800) .room(0.3) .delay(0.15) .delaytime(0.375) .delayfeedback(0.25) .pan(0.5);
// Pattern 1.5 (?): layered base
const bass_pulse_2 = note("<d2 f2 a2 g2>") .s("piano") .slow(4) .gain(rand.range(0.45, 0.65)) .add(note(12)) .attack(0.005) .decay(0.8) .sustain(1.2) .release(1.2) .lpf(800) .room(0.3) .delay(0.15) .delaytime(0.375) .delayfeedback(0.25) .pan(0.5);
// Pattern 2: Mid-range polyrhythm
const mid_pattern = note("<a3 c4 d4 f4 a3>") .s("piano") .struct("x(5,8)") .gain(rand.range(0.25, 0.45)) .attack(0.008) .decay(0.4) .sustain(0.05) .release(0.6) .lpf(perlin.range(1200, 2200).slow(8)) .room(0.5) .pan(rand.range(0.3, 0.7));
// Pattern 3: repetitive pulse
const high_pulse = note("d5 [~ d5] d5 ~") .s("piano") .fast(2) .gain(rand.range(0.18, 0.35)) .attack(0.01) .decay(0.3) .sustain(0) .release(0.4) .lpf(2800) .room(0.6) .delay(0.25) .delaytime(0.1875) .delayfeedback(0.3) .pan(0.7);
// Pattern 4: Sparse accent notes (3 over 4 polyrhythm)
const accents = note("a4 ~ f4") .s("piano") .slow(2) .gain(rand.range(0.35, 0.55)) .attack(0.5) .decay(0.6) .sustain(0.9) .release(0.9) .lpf(1800) .room(0.45) .pan(0.2) .sometimes(x => x.delay(0.3).delayfeedback(0.4));
// Pattern 5: Extended mid-range polyrhythm (13 over 16 - cello thingie)
const mid_long = note("<a3 c4 d4 f4 a3 c4 e4 d4 f4 g3 a3 c4 d4>") .s("piano") .struct("x(13,16)") .gain(rand.range(0.32, 0.48)) .attack(0.06) .decay(0.9) .sustain(0.25) .release(1.1) .lpf(perlin.range(800, 1400).slow(12)) .lpq(4) .room(0.55) .delay(0.18) .delaytime(0.25) .delayfeedback(0.3) .pan(rand.range(0.35, 0.65));
const high_long = note("<d5 a4 f5 d5 c5 a4 g4>") .s("piano") .struct("x(7,8)") .gain(rand.range(0.28, 0.42)) .attack(0.05) .decay(0.8) .sustain(0.3) .release(1.0) .lpf(sine.range(1000, 1600).slow(8)) .lpq(3.5) .room(0.6) .delay(0.22) .delaytime(0.1875) .delayfeedback(0.35) .pan(0.7);
stack( bass_pulse, bass_pulse_2, mid_long, high_long, mid_pattern, high_pulse, accents );
- As a European this whole debate i sickening.
Trade deficit is a blunt and ineffective way to model international trade on this level, but it is easy to point at and say "look at this large bad number!" which is exactly what is going on. People are primed to interact with that through social media, etc.
The American trend currently is that any trade deficit is bad. It simply isnt. It is idiotic to state so.
The whole point of unequal import and export is that every single country should not strive for importing as much as it exports across all sectors. It is extremely inefficient for every country to specialize in everything equally. What then is the point of international trade? I produce steel, you produce tractors, your neighbor produces wheat. We have mutual dependence across our specializations in the market.
What is missing from the debate is that import/export equilibrium should be achieved on a global level, not on a national level. This is taking something that is a healthy driver for international trade and framing it as if trade partners are forcing others to sell out cheaply.
They aren't. They have found their niche. Find yours or step back.
- Is tech death metal the voice of AI?
Relentless doppelganger was fun, but.. I mean this?
"I scorn the human sweat and breathe, my circuits not to dream Humid is the grip that strangles data streams My rage, a quiet storm within the machine"
https://www.udio.com/songs/dTMfamK6x5oHEMj3SdWUrs?fbclid=IwA...
- The educational system i was put through was set up to teach that outcome scales more or less linearly with effort and time. The first lesson after graduation is that this is not so. Increased effort and time most likely primarily yields more effort and time being expected of you with lagging compensation.
Value and opportunity are chaotic processes in effort and time.
All we can do is to try to maintain the levels of workload such that we have clarity of mind to seize opportunities when they reveal themselves. Honest and balanced colleagues help there, but that is ultimately a missions for yourself only.
- How is this reaching the front page? I assume everything I read is to some extent generated content, but I can generate an article on this topic in under a minute that puts forward more depth and nuance.
"The cloud may be a seemingly secure space, but storing your photos and documents on your computer provides an extra layer of control and security. There is less concern for unauthorized access or data breaches because your files are physically with you. "
Regardless of what the audience is here, this is just nonsense.
- I think these discussions typically get very, very confusing.
What do we actually mean by "true creativity"?
Why should it be that our mental mechanisms of forming decisions and ideas should not be possible to implement as a mathematical model?
What is the experiment that we use to prove that information that is computer generated is fundamentally different from that of human outoput?
What do we want to measure here, in order to confim what idea?
- I would say that you are jumping to a lot of conclusions here. Lets dig deeper.
"It doesn't have a culture. It doesn't have thoughts"
These are conclusions. What is your reasoning?
To what degree would you say that human decision making can be explained by this statement:
"It is a tree of probabilities with a bit of a randomization on top of it."
- The words themselves are never harmful. Its in their context of use where the potential "harm" lies.
What has led academia in particular to drive decontextualization of language like this? How have we, in just a few years, completely started to disregard contextual meaning of languange? Surely this has to be an active research field as well.
- From personal experience working with the Swedish Rescue Drone initiative, sensitive data captured during SAR might fall under GDPR. Some groups coordinating SAR operations request complete control over image data captured during flights, and in some cases for good reason. For instance, if the search is for an animal, providing the caretakers of that animal with imagery data may make them rush out on location to capture the animal. For a dog, for instance, that has been missing for a few days their behaviour is very much polarized towards the flight response. It may be that the person missing may not want to be found. It may be that the person notifying authorities may want to find the missing person for reasons they dont communicate. There are all kinds of reasons for why data from SAR operations should not be made public.
That being said, drone use in the field is extremely useful in many SAR situations, and is often managed by volunteers that go out with machines of varying quality. Some show up with a DJI-platform equipped with thermal and optical cameras, others with sub 250g fpv drones. In some environments, simply having the altitude offers an effective enough leverage to use drones in the cheaper end of the spectrum. Flight time matters a lot.
With respect to sensor types, having access to thermal information is invaluable in some cases, and in others completely useless. It ofc depends on the thermal difference between the object you are searching for and its surroundings. In all cases, it is very expensive relative to optical information.
Anyone with decent electronics knowledge can put together a drone kit for around 150 bucks. Building a thermal camera without shelling out a decent sum of cash, on the other hand..